Page 9 of 30
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:25 pm
by Jennifer Steadman
What's the fewest number of points dropped during an octorun? It would be cool to see a table of points available, points scored, and where points were dropped (i.e. on letters, numbers and conundrums). If that's possible.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:19 am
by Dave Preece
Guy Barry wrote:Dave Preece wrote:Has the same question ever been asked thrice in a row on this thread?
That wasn't the same as the last two questions, so I presume the answer's no.
Fishy-fishy...
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:02 pm
by Jon Stitcher
So no player has maxed every numbers game in an octorun, what's the most amount of numbers games someone has played and maintained a 100% record on the show?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:03 pm
by Andy Platt
I think Worsley only missed one in his 7th or 8th heat game.
Edit:- 7th game, round 5, ie overall his 19th numbers round. I reckon nobody will have more than that.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:10 pm
by Jon Stitcher
I know Andy,
I'm asking what's the most amount of numbers games played where a player maintained a 100% record throughout their entire run. so losing the 5th game but maxing every numbers for example.
I'm expecting it to be someone who lost their first game but maxed all the numbers.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:11 pm
by Jon Stitcher
But I see the ambiguity in my post. so I thank you for your response.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 6:39 pm
by Philip Wilson
Apologies if this has been asked before, but has a teatime teaser solution ever appeared in subsequent rounds in the same programme? If so did the contestants solve it [assuming there wasn't a 9 letter word in that round to win with]? Or perhaps if this happens, do they just record a new teatime teaser and edit it in?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 6:43 pm
by Ben Wilson
Philip Wilson wrote:Apologies if this has been asked before, but has a teatime teaser solution ever appeared in subsequent rounds in the same programme? If so did the contestants solve it [assuming there wasn't a 9 letter word in that round to win with]? Or perhaps if this happens, do they just record a new teatime teaser and edit it in?
By happy coincidence, the person who posted before you is in the best position to
answer that question.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:17 pm
by Philip Wilson
Ben Wilson wrote:Philip Wilson wrote:Apologies if this has been asked before, but has a teatime teaser solution ever appeared in subsequent rounds in the same programme? If so did the contestants solve it [assuming there wasn't a 9 letter word in that round to win with]? Or perhaps if this happens, do they just record a new teatime teaser and edit it in?
By happy coincidence, the person who posted before you is in the best position to
answer that question.
Brilliant! Thanx. In the very next round too! Thinking about it I guess there would be too much give-away reaction from everybody present to just record a different teaser.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:45 pm
by Graeme Cole
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:55 pm
by Graeme Cole
Johnny Canuck wrote:A while back, I asked the same question. I believe 10 games have had two instances in a row of the same target... or 11 including this most recent one.
If Graeme will kindly accept ANOTHER two questions from me:
* What word has most frequently been used as a conundrum?
* What is the most frequently used conundrum scramble?
ABSCONDED, APPLAUDED, DECLARING, DESTROYED, EXCEPTION, FORTUNATE, IMPLICATE, INSOLENCE, MEMORABLE, PERPETUAL, POLLUTION, PONDERING, SCRATCHED, TEMPORARY and TURBULENT have all been used five times as of the end of series 68.
The most-used conundrum scramble is LOVEFRAUD, which has been used four times (and never been solved!)...
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_964 http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_1213 http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_4663 http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_4805
19 scrambles have been used three times, including GREATDRIP which was used in two series finals,
series 14 and
series 52. Incidentally, the series 52 final came less than two years after the same scramble was
used in a heat game. Also notable in this list is FREEDRUTH, which was, presumably accidentally, given to the same player twice:
episode 611 and
episode 614.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 8:28 pm
by Graeme Cole
Jennifer Steadman wrote:What's the fewest number of points dropped during an octorun? It would be cool to see a table of points available, points scored, and where points were dropped (i.e. on letters, numbers and conundrums). If that's possible.
Table of points scored by 15-round octochamps in heat games, divided by round type, along with the max available in each round type, sorted by total points dropped. Points dropped is the max minus your score, so if you got a seven but were beaten by an eight, and that was the max, you still dropped eight points. Tiebreaks aren't counted.
Code: Select all
LETTERS MAX NUMBERS MAX CONS MAX TOTAL MAX DROPPED
Craig Beevers 609 667 228 240 70 80 907 987 80
Edward McCullagh 602 659 234 240 60 80 896 979 83
Jack Hurst 655 717 231 234 60 80 946 1031 85
Julian Fell 650 701 194 234 80 80 924 1015 91
Giles Hutchings 609 669 286 311 70 80 965 1060 95
Kirk Bevins 644 711 221 240 60 80 925 1031 106
David O'Donnell 600 681 220 234 60 80 880 995 115
Chris Davies 626 693 196 240 70 80 892 1013 121
Conor Travers 609 704 211 237 70 80 890 1021 131
Jonathan Rawlinson 565 662 205 240 80 80 850 982 132
Eoin Monaghan 609 711 229 240 60 80 898 1031 133
Adam Gillard 612 724 221 240 70 80 903 1044 141
Andrew Hulme 646 757 214 240 70 80 930 1077 147
Andy Platt 620 682 239 274 30 80 889 1036 147
Innis Carson 598 691 193 240 70 80 861 1011 150
Stewart Holden 618 711 182 234 70 80 870 1025 155
Martin Bishop 566 667 193 225 50 80 809 972 163
Paul Gallen 585 693 211 237 50 80 846 1010 164
Tom Hargreaves 587 695 213 240 50 80 850 1015 165
Graeme Cole 568 666 215 234 30 80 813 980 167
Lee Hartley 552 670 189 229 70 80 811 979 168
Jon Corby 586 704 210 240 60 80 856 1024 168
Daniel Pati 589 688 171 240 80 80 840 1008 168
Richard Heald 562 651 193 234 40 80 795 965 170
George Greenhough 564 668 183 240 70 80 817 988 171
Grace Page 591 682 188 240 50 80 829 1002 173
Mark Deeks 546 681 228 237 50 80 824 998 174
Oliver Garner 565 661 207 237 30 80 802 978 176
Paul Howe 550 683 215 234 50 80 815 997 182
Marcus Hares 572 710 202 227 60 80 834 1017 183
Chris Cummins 557 726 231 237 70 80 858 1043 185
Matthew Shore 617 717 183 240 50 80 850 1037 187
Jack Welsby 576 703 215 237 40 80 831 1020 189
Tom Rowell 532 648 212 237 30 80 774 965 191
Stuart Earl 541 687 196 237 70 80 807 1004 197
Mark Tournoff 543 690 196 237 70 80 809 1007 198
Steven Briers 562 726 221 237 60 80 843 1043 200
James Hurrell 577 721 191 237 70 80 838 1038 200
Tom Barnes 586 709 186 234 50 80 822 1023 201
Peter Lee 572 687 169 237 60 80 801 1004 203
John Mayhew 584 697 157 240 70 80 811 1017 206
Jeffrey Hansford 600 707 148 237 70 80 818 1024 206
Sweyn Kirkness 557 675 168 217 40 80 765 972 207
Charlie Reams 579 708 191 240 50 80 820 1028 208
Chris Wills 591 765 214 240 70 80 875 1085 210
Michael Macdonald-Cooper 602 675 138 237 40 80 780 992 212
Jack Worsley 541 710 237 240 40 80 818 1030 212
Danny Hamilton 515 663 176 234 70 80 761 977 216
Neil Zussman 529 660 169 234 60 80 758 974 216
Richard Brittain 582 717 218 240 20 80 820 1037 217
Jim Bentley 492 664 214 234 50 80 756 978 222
Kevin Thurlow 548 672 191 240 30 80 769 992 223
John Hunt 525 686 213 237 40 80 778 1003 225
Jon O'Neill 520 709 224 240 60 80 804 1029 225
John Brackstone 588 733 194 234 40 80 822 1047 225
Scott Gillies 555 715 225 240 30 80 810 1035 225
Paul James 572 703 172 240 50 80 794 1023 229
Jimmy Gough 578 694 184 237 20 80 782 1011 229
Wendy Roe 564 691 157 240 60 80 781 1011 230
Kai Laddiman 510 672 166 237 80 80 756 989 233
Junaid Mubeen 502 707 218 237 70 80 790 1024 234
Brian Selway 524 663 172 240 50 80 746 983 237
Cate Henderson 529 703 193 237 60 80 782 1020 238
Shane Roberts 531 687 175 237 60 80 766 1004 238
David Barnard 537 694 194 237 40 80 771 1011 240
Rupert Stokoe 543 703 183 234 50 80 776 1017 241
Ryan Taylor 557 716 225 240 10 80 792 1036 244
Stuart Solomons 581 721 185 240 30 80 796 1041 245
Tim Reypert 549 704 164 234 60 80 773 1018 245
Keith Maynard 567 728 178 227 40 80 785 1035 250
John Gray 528 689 189 240 40 80 757 1009 252
Paul Keane 495 676 189 240 60 80 744 996 252
Aaron Webber 532 713 191 234 50 80 773 1027 254
David Edwards 485 675 202 240 50 80 737 995 258
Martin Gardner 528 694 178 234 40 80 746 1008 262
Steven Moir 525 721 178 230 60 80 763 1031 268
Richard Pay 467 691 205 230 60 80 732 1001 269
Jonathan Coles 526 705 160 230 60 80 746 1015 269
Eileen Taylor 484 624 220 320 50 80 754 1024 270
John Davies 505 720 221 240 40 80 766 1040 274
Jean Webby 501 698 177 237 60 80 738 1015 277
Gary Male 550 721 180 227 20 80 750 1028 278
James Roberts 493 703 193 231 50 80 736 1014 278
Mike Pullin 490 721 216 237 50 80 756 1038 282
Nik Von Uexkull 517 717 172 234 60 80 749 1031 282
David Von Geyer 499 691 165 240 60 80 724 1011 287
Heather Styles 518 707 189 240 30 80 737 1027 290
Liam Shaw 490 685 178 237 40 80 708 1002 294
Rose Boyle 489 684 182 231 30 80 701 995 294
Michael Bowden 511 720 208 237 20 80 739 1037 298
Andy McGurn 505 684 167 237 30 80 702 1001 299
Jayne Wisniewski 500 687 185 237 20 80 705 1004 299
Carl Williams 505 691 173 237 30 80 708 1008 300
Stu Horsey 481 716 211 237 40 80 732 1033 301
James Doohan 467 684 205 234 20 80 692 998 306
Ross Allatt 528 731 173 237 40 80 741 1048 307
Joe McGonigle 417 633 239 320 60 80 716 1033 317
Amey Deshpande 500 735 168 221 50 80 718 1036 318
Nick Wainwright 482 725 214 240 30 80 726 1045 319
Brenda Jolley 509 721 149 240 60 80 718 1041 323
Steve Wood 468 681 167 237 40 80 675 998 323
Chris Marshall 460 690 192 240 30 80 682 1010 328
Ned Pendleton 466 677 188 237 10 80 664 994 330
Tia Corkish 505 710 152 237 40 80 697 1027 330
Julia Wilkinson 577 760 137 237 30 80 744 1077 333
Suzi Purcell 470 708 156 237 60 80 686 1025 339
Joe Zubaidi 474 686 151 240 40 80 665 1006 341
Danny Pledger 448 661 167 240 20 80 635 981 346
Judith Young 504 735 143 240 60 80 707 1055 348
Chris McHenry 456 674 157 237 30 80 643 991 348
Tony Warren 484 750 158 240 70 80 712 1070 358
David Thirlwall 490 748 164 237 50 80 704 1065 361
Jeffrey Burgin 517 731 158 237 10 80 685 1048 363
Dave Taylor 489 750 182 234 20 80 691 1064 373
Glen Webb isn't on this table as the database only goes up to the end of series 68. He got 945 points out of 1093, dropping 148 points.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2013 11:55 pm
by Graeme Cole
Jon Stitcher wrote:I know Andy,
I'm asking what's the most amount of numbers games played where a player maintained a 100% record throughout their entire run. so losing the 5th game but maxing every numbers for example.
I'm expecting it to be someone who lost their first game but maxed all the numbers.
Up to the end of series 68, 418 people have a perfect record in all the numbers rounds they ever played on the show. Of those,
Graham Dugdale played the most numbers rounds, scoring 90 out of 90 on numbers in his three games.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:47 am
by Clive Brooker
It's interesting that despite all the training support available to modern players, Julian still seems to be the letters king. How different would the picture be if all games are taken into account?
Graeme Cole wrote:Up to the end of series 68, 418 people have a perfect record in all the numbers rounds they ever played on the show. Of those,
Graham Dugdale played the most numbers rounds, scoring 90 out of 90 on numbers in his three games.
Has anyone progressed further through a run before dropping his/her first points in a numbers round?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Aug 14, 2013 9:46 am
by Dave Preece
Graeme Cole wrote:Jennifer Steadman wrote:What's the fewest number of points dropped during an octorun? It would be cool to see a table of points available, points scored, and where points were dropped (i.e. on letters, numbers and conundrums). If that's possible.
Table of points scored by 15-round octochamps in heat games, divided by round type, along with the max available in each round type, sorted by total points dropped. Points dropped is the max minus your score, so if you got a seven but were beaten by an eight, and that was the max, you still dropped eight points. Tiebreaks aren't counted.
Code: Select all
LETTERS MAX NUMBERS MAX CONS MAX TOTAL MAX DROPPED
Craig Beevers 609 667 228 240 70 80 907 987 80
Edward McCullagh 602 659 234 240 60 80 896 979 83
Jack Hurst 655 717 231 234 60 80 946 1031 85
Julian Fell 650 701 194 234 80 80 924 1015 91
Giles Hutchings 609 669 286 311 70 80 965 1060 95
Kirk Bevins 644 711 221 240 60 80 925 1031 106
David O'Donnell 600 681 220 234 60 80 880 995 115
Chris Davies 626 693 196 240 70 80 892 1013 121
Conor Travers 609 704 211 237 70 80 890 1021 131
Jonathan Rawlinson 565 662 205 240 80 80 850 982 132
Eoin Monaghan 609 711 229 240 60 80 898 1031 133
Adam Gillard 612 724 221 240 70 80 903 1044 141
Andrew Hulme 646 757 214 240 70 80 930 1077 147
Andy Platt 620 682 239 274 30 80 889 1036 147
Innis Carson 598 691 193 240 70 80 861 1011 150
Stewart Holden 618 711 182 234 70 80 870 1025 155
Martin Bishop 566 667 193 225 50 80 809 972 163
Paul Gallen 585 693 211 237 50 80 846 1010 164
Tom Hargreaves 587 695 213 240 50 80 850 1015 165
Graeme Cole 568 666 215 234 30 80 813 980 167
Lee Hartley 552 670 189 229 70 80 811 979 168
Jon Corby 586 704 210 240 60 80 856 1024 168
Daniel Pati 589 688 171 240 80 80 840 1008 168
Richard Heald 562 651 193 234 40 80 795 965 170
George Greenhough 564 668 183 240 70 80 817 988 171
Grace Page 591 682 188 240 50 80 829 1002 173
Mark Deeks 546 681 228 237 50 80 824 998 174
Oliver Garner 565 661 207 237 30 80 802 978 176
Paul Howe 550 683 215 234 50 80 815 997 182
Marcus Hares 572 710 202 227 60 80 834 1017 183
Chris Cummins 557 726 231 237 70 80 858 1043 185
Matthew Shore 617 717 183 240 50 80 850 1037 187
Jack Welsby 576 703 215 237 40 80 831 1020 189
Tom Rowell 532 648 212 237 30 80 774 965 191
Stuart Earl 541 687 196 237 70 80 807 1004 197
Mark Tournoff 543 690 196 237 70 80 809 1007 198
Steven Briers 562 726 221 237 60 80 843 1043 200
James Hurrell 577 721 191 237 70 80 838 1038 200
Tom Barnes 586 709 186 234 50 80 822 1023 201
Peter Lee 572 687 169 237 60 80 801 1004 203
John Mayhew 584 697 157 240 70 80 811 1017 206
Jeffrey Hansford 600 707 148 237 70 80 818 1024 206
Sweyn Kirkness 557 675 168 217 40 80 765 972 207
Charlie Reams 579 708 191 240 50 80 820 1028 208
Chris Wills 591 765 214 240 70 80 875 1085 210
Michael Macdonald-Cooper 602 675 138 237 40 80 780 992 212
Jack Worsley 541 710 237 240 40 80 818 1030 212
Danny Hamilton 515 663 176 234 70 80 761 977 216
Neil Zussman 529 660 169 234 60 80 758 974 216
Richard Brittain 582 717 218 240 20 80 820 1037 217
Jim Bentley 492 664 214 234 50 80 756 978 222
Kevin Thurlow 548 672 191 240 30 80 769 992 223
John Hunt 525 686 213 237 40 80 778 1003 225
Jon O'Neill 520 709 224 240 60 80 804 1029 225
John Brackstone 588 733 194 234 40 80 822 1047 225
Scott Gillies 555 715 225 240 30 80 810 1035 225
Paul James 572 703 172 240 50 80 794 1023 229
Jimmy Gough 578 694 184 237 20 80 782 1011 229
Wendy Roe 564 691 157 240 60 80 781 1011 230
Kai Laddiman 510 672 166 237 80 80 756 989 233
Junaid Mubeen 502 707 218 237 70 80 790 1024 234
Brian Selway 524 663 172 240 50 80 746 983 237
Cate Henderson 529 703 193 237 60 80 782 1020 238
Shane Roberts 531 687 175 237 60 80 766 1004 238
David Barnard 537 694 194 237 40 80 771 1011 240
Rupert Stokoe 543 703 183 234 50 80 776 1017 241
Ryan Taylor 557 716 225 240 10 80 792 1036 244
Stuart Solomons 581 721 185 240 30 80 796 1041 245
Tim Reypert 549 704 164 234 60 80 773 1018 245
Keith Maynard 567 728 178 227 40 80 785 1035 250
John Gray 528 689 189 240 40 80 757 1009 252
Paul Keane 495 676 189 240 60 80 744 996 252
Aaron Webber 532 713 191 234 50 80 773 1027 254
David Edwards 485 675 202 240 50 80 737 995 258
Martin Gardner 528 694 178 234 40 80 746 1008 262
Steven Moir 525 721 178 230 60 80 763 1031 268
Richard Pay 467 691 205 230 60 80 732 1001 269
Jonathan Coles 526 705 160 230 60 80 746 1015 269
Eileen Taylor 484 624 220 320 50 80 754 1024 270
John Davies 505 720 221 240 40 80 766 1040 274
Jean Webby 501 698 177 237 60 80 738 1015 277
Gary Male 550 721 180 227 20 80 750 1028 278
James Roberts 493 703 193 231 50 80 736 1014 278
Mike Pullin 490 721 216 237 50 80 756 1038 282
Nik Von Uexkull 517 717 172 234 60 80 749 1031 282
David Von Geyer 499 691 165 240 60 80 724 1011 287
Heather Styles 518 707 189 240 30 80 737 1027 290
Liam Shaw 490 685 178 237 40 80 708 1002 294
Rose Boyle 489 684 182 231 30 80 701 995 294
Michael Bowden 511 720 208 237 20 80 739 1037 298
Andy McGurn 505 684 167 237 30 80 702 1001 299
Jayne Wisniewski 500 687 185 237 20 80 705 1004 299
Carl Williams 505 691 173 237 30 80 708 1008 300
Stu Horsey 481 716 211 237 40 80 732 1033 301
James Doohan 467 684 205 234 20 80 692 998 306
Ross Allatt 528 731 173 237 40 80 741 1048 307
Joe McGonigle 417 633 239 320 60 80 716 1033 317
Amey Deshpande 500 735 168 221 50 80 718 1036 318
Nick Wainwright 482 725 214 240 30 80 726 1045 319
Brenda Jolley 509 721 149 240 60 80 718 1041 323
Steve Wood 468 681 167 237 40 80 675 998 323
Chris Marshall 460 690 192 240 30 80 682 1010 328
Ned Pendleton 466 677 188 237 10 80 664 994 330
Tia Corkish 505 710 152 237 40 80 697 1027 330
Julia Wilkinson 577 760 137 237 30 80 744 1077 333
Suzi Purcell 470 708 156 237 60 80 686 1025 339
Joe Zubaidi 474 686 151 240 40 80 665 1006 341
Danny Pledger 448 661 167 240 20 80 635 981 346
Judith Young 504 735 143 240 60 80 707 1055 348
Chris McHenry 456 674 157 237 30 80 643 991 348
Tony Warren 484 750 158 240 70 80 712 1070 358
David Thirlwall 490 748 164 237 50 80 704 1065 361
Jeffrey Burgin 517 731 158 237 10 80 685 1048 363
Dave Taylor 489 750 182 234 20 80 691 1064 373
Glen Webb isn't on this table as the database only goes up to the end of series 68. He got 945 points out of 1093, dropping 148 points.
Could you do the same stats for all xicounts please if possible?
Also, please could you do the same for all 9 round octochamps and xicounts!
Would make intereting reading, especially if afterwards, all stats could be leveled out in one???
Hope you can Graeme!
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:57 am
by David Barnard
Not sur eif this has been asked before as I haven't trawled through the numerous questions but do I hold the dubious honour of being the octochamp with the most disallowed words?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 15, 2013 10:48 pm
by Dave Preece
I do remember you getting a few disallowed, it didn't stop me being very impressed with your run though...
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 11:19 am
by David Barnard
Dave Preece wrote:I do remember you getting a few disallowed, it didn't stop me being very impressed with your run though...
Thanks
I was no record breaker (and still wouldn't be now) I just went on for fun
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 2:59 pm
by Jon Stitcher
Philip Wilson wrote:Ben Wilson wrote:Philip Wilson wrote:Apologies if this has been asked before, but has a teatime teaser solution ever appeared in subsequent rounds in the same programme? If so did the contestants solve it [assuming there wasn't a 9 letter word in that round to win with]? Or perhaps if this happens, do they just record a new teatime teaser and edit it in?
By happy coincidence, the person who posted before you is in the best position to
answer that question.
Brilliant! Thanx. In the very next round too! Thinking about it I guess there would be too much give-away reaction from everybody present to just record a different teaser.
I don't know if I'd have seen this or not, but out of the corner of my eye I saw Susie laughing to the DC guest so I knew there was something funny there and then it jumped out at me. My reaction was one of sheer bewidlerment and Richard made comments about it before asking for my word so there was no chance of redoing the teaser or replaying the round.
I could probably get this on youtube actually.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 3:05 pm
by Jon Stitcher
Up to the end of series 68, 418 people have a perfect record in all the numbers rounds they ever played on the show. Of those,
Graham Dugdale played the most numbers rounds, scoring 90 out of 90 on numbers in his three games.[/quote]
Ha, I just looked through his 9 numbers games and I am pretty sure I solved all 9 in a cumulative time of under 30 seconds!
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:45 pm
by Andy McGurn
Do I hold any countdown records? I mean, even if its something silly like "most words misdeclared as a nine", I'd love to be able to say I was a countdown record holder.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 3:08 pm
by James Robinson
Andy McGurn wrote:Do I hold any countdown records? I mean, even if its something silly like "most words misdeclared as a nine", I'd love to be able to say I was a countdown record holder.
Well, the only other person to misdeclare a 9 was Tony Harding in Series 47, when he declared LEGATORS as a 9 in round 1, and luckily still won by a single point!:
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_3213
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:22 pm
by Jack Worsley
You mean
LEGATORS, James?
On the subject of misdeclaring length, how many people have offered a word that's more than nine letters long in a letters round? I know of three cases which I'll list below, are there any more?
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_3907
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5488
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5491
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:34 am
by Andy Platt
I'm honestly not sure how you do that. lol
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:07 pm
by Chris Philpot
The recent discovery of the new species
Olinguito got me thinking: what's the closest we've come to a letters selection where OLINGUITO was available, had it been a valid word at the time?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:25 am
by Philip Wilson
Jon Stitcher wrote:
I don't know if I'd have seen this or not, but out of the corner of my eye I saw Susie laughing to the DC guest so I knew there was something funny there and then it jumped out at me. My reaction was one of sheer bewidlerment and Richard made comments about it before asking for my word so there was no chance of redoing the teaser or replaying the round.
I could probably get this on youtube actually.
I'd be interested Jon.
Jon Stitcher wrote:Up to the end of series 68, 418 people have a perfect record in all the numbers rounds they ever played on the show. Of those,
Graham Dugdale played the most numbers rounds, scoring 90 out of 90 on numbers in his three games.
Ha, I just looked through his 9 numbers games and I am pretty sure I solved all 9 in a cumulative time of under 30 seconds![/quote]
OMG yeah, though the 253 took me a bit longer, doing 506/2 instead.
But 100 coming up 6 times [!], and 50 twice, out of 9 is amazing luck!
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:15 pm
by Johnny Canuck
Chris Philpot wrote:The recent discovery of the new species
Olinguito got me thinking: what's the closest we've come to a letters selection where OLINGUITO was available, had it been a valid word at the time?
Round 6
here is 2 letters out. If I may be Graeme for a moment.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:08 pm
by Graeme Cole
Clive Brooker wrote:It's interesting that despite all the training support available to modern players, Julian still seems to be the letters king. How different would the picture be if all games are taken into account?
Graeme Cole wrote:Up to the end of series 68, 418 people have a perfect record in all the numbers rounds they ever played on the show. Of those,
Graham Dugdale played the most numbers rounds, scoring 90 out of 90 on numbers in his three games.
Has anyone progressed further through a run before dropping his/her first points in a numbers round?
Jack Worsley maxed his first 18 numbers rounds. He got as far as his
7th game before missing one. That's the most successive numbers rounds maxed by a player from the start of their run. In second place is
Richard Campbell who maxed his first 12 numbers rounds.
Chris Butler maxed his first 11, and
Matthew Francis,
Matthew Turner,
Paul Howe and
Jennifer Bett maxed their first 10.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:16 pm
by Graeme Cole
David Barnard wrote:Not sur eif this has been asked before as I haven't trawled through the numerous questions but do I hold the dubious honour of being the octochamp with the most disallowed words?
No.
Dundas Keating holds the record, having had 18 words disallowed in heat games.
David Edwards and
Peter Zyss had 13.
Junaid Mubeen and
Stu Horsey had 12, and you and
Aaron Webber had 11.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:20 pm
by Graeme Cole
Those are the only three.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 10:37 pm
by Giles
Octochamps with least disallowed words?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 12:36 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Giles wrote:Octochamps with least disallowed words?
I don't think Julian Fell had any. Dylan only had one.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 12:59 pm
by Andy Platt
Must be loads on zero. I had one in the 8 prelims and two in the finals
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:28 pm
by Innis Carson
Kirk didn't have anything disallowed in his octorun either (well, not counting HEDARIM). There could be quite a few more too, it's something pretty much anyone could have achieved.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:07 pm
by Gavin Chipper
What's the least Darrenic round that's there's been (with the most words at the max length)? I presume that this also would answer the question of what is the least Darrenic possible round, because it must have come up. (Although things may be complicated by different dictionaries at different times.)
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:25 pm
by Andy Platt
I had a round on Apterous that had around 35 sevens and no eights. That has a shot at being the least darrenic round possible. I'm trying to find it now, all I remember is who I was playing at the time.
Edit: Can't find it, my opponent was Marcus and I've been back as far as September 2011 in our H2H.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:35 pm
by Thomas Carey
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_80 Round 2, because old dictionary didn't have ERRATICS.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:52 pm
by Graeme Cole
Giles wrote:Octochamps with least disallowed words?
I wondered why you asked that...
Six 15-round octochamps had no words disallowed in their heats: Tom Hargreaves, Julian Fell, Richard Brittain, Michael Macdonald-Cooper, Kirk Bevins and you.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:18 am
by Jon Corby
Graeme Cole wrote:Giles wrote:Octochamps with least disallowed words?
I wondered why you asked that...
Six 15-round octochamps had no words disallowed in their heats: Tom Hargreaves, Julian Fell,
Richard Brittain, Michael Macdonald-Cooper, Kirk Bevins and you.
lol
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:44 pm
by Tom
Apologies if this has been asked before, but has any Octochamp and series finalist (regardless of whether they won or lost the final) got all 11 conundrums out of 11 or in the case of the 9 round format, 12 out of 12?
From memory in my series, I think Chris Wills got 10 conundrums out of 11 so if no-one has done a clean sweep, surely Chris must hold the record for this (or very few others would share it?)
TH
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:39 am
by Graeme Cole
Tom wrote:Apologies if this has been asked before, but has any Octochamp and series finalist (regardless of whether they won or lost the final) got all 11 conundrums out of 11 or in the case of the 9 round format, 12 out of 12?
From memory in my series, I think Chris Wills got 10 conundrums out of 11 so if no-one has done a clean sweep, surely Chris must hold the record for this (or very few others would share it?)
TH
No series finalist has ever solved all their conundrums up to that point.
Darryl Francis got 10 out of 12. Harvey Freeman got at least 10 out of 12. Chris Wills, Julian Fell and Mark Tournoff got 10 out of 11.
Note that we don't have any details of
Harvey Freeman's semi-final other than the final score. So he might have got 11 out of 12.
Incidentally, does anyone know how sure we can be that the picture of TRAGEDIAN is from that game? The caption says it was one of Harvey Freeman's words, and certainly Harvey Freeman didn't offer TRAGEDIAN in any of his other games. However, the
image page itself says it was one of Allan Saldanha's words. Then again, that page and the episode page can't even agree on whether it's Cathy Hytner or Karen Loughlin. We've got details of all Allan Saldanha's games, and a quick query of my database tells me that TRAGEDIAN is only recorded as being offered in
one game, which didn't involve Allan Saldanha, so it's definitely not him. So I'm prepared to believe that that picture is from the missing semi-final, I'm just curious about how we know that.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:28 am
by Heather Styles
I have a hunch that the Series 67 finals are the closest series finals on record. Is there any chance that this half-baked theory could be run through the askgraeme-o-meter?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:38 am
by Matt Morrison
Graeme, this thread is not called "Graeme Asks" - pipe down.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 5:08 pm
by James Robinson
Graeme Cole wrote:Incidentally, does anyone know how sure we can be that the picture of TRAGEDIAN is from that game? The caption says it was one of Harvey Freeman's words, and certainly Harvey Freeman didn't offer TRAGEDIAN in any of his other games.
Go to 5:53 here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EpZpoxPCoI
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:06 pm
by Graeme Cole
Heather Styles wrote:I have a hunch that the Series 67 finals are the closest series finals on record. Is there any chance that this half-baked theory could be run through the askgraeme-o-meter?
I'm taking this as the sum of all the winning margins in the finals. Where a game went to a tiebreak I've taken the margin as zero rather than ten.
By this reckoning, series 67 is the tenth most closely fought 15-round finals.
Series 53 was the closest.
Code: Select all
SERIES TOTAL MARGIN IN QFs ONWARDS
53 82
51 105
46 116
56 123
66 127
55 153
50 163
47 172
57 178
67 184
58 188
60 190
59 210
54 223
52 228
48 231
61 235
65 238
62 241
49 254
63 265
64 270
68 271
Suppose we look at "closeness" a different way, and define it as the largest difference between the two players' scores at any point in the game. If we do it this way, series 67 is still tenth. However, the two semi-finals in that series were the closest semi-finals in 15-round history.
Paul James and Rose Boyle were never more than eight points apart, and
you and David Barnard were never more than 10 apart. Only one other semi-final equals this:
Kirk Bevins v Neil Zussman.
Re: Matt Whinges
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:07 pm
by Graeme Cole
Matt Morrison wrote:Graeme, this thread is not called "Graeme Asks" - pipe down.
FTFY.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:30 pm
by Heather Styles
Thanks, Graeme. Is there any limit to your awesomeness? (This is a rhetorical question, not a proper Ask Graeme? question.)
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 12:16 am
by Johnny Canuck
Shouldn't this thread be called "Ask Graeme!", with an exclamation mark? It's an imperative -- we're commanding people to ask Graeme questions.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:29 pm
by Graeme Cole
Johnny Canuck wrote:Shouldn't this thread be called "Ask Graeme!", with an exclamation mark? It's an imperative -- we're commanding people to ask Graeme questions.
Don't know. Ask Ryan?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:18 pm
by Dave Preece
Hi Graeme, have you got an answer to my last question please
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 12:29 am
by Graeme Cole
Dave Preece wrote:Could you do the same stats for all xicounts please if possible?
Also, please could you do the same for all 9 round octochamps and xicounts!
Would make intereting reading, especially if afterwards, all stats could be leveled out in one???
Hope you can Graeme!
I don't think it makes sense to put 9 round octochamps next to 15 round octochamps in a table showing the number of points dropped, because of the difference in the number of rounds played. 9 round octochamps are more difficult anyway, as I need to pay special attention to what rounds we do and don't have complete information for.
15-round xicounts is doable, though.
Code: Select all
LETTERS MAX NUMBERS MAX CONS MAX TOTAL MAX DROPPED
Jack Hurst 871 949 315 318 90 110 1276 1377 101
Craig Beevers 851 914 315 330 70 110 1236 1354 118
Edward McCullagh 841 921 309 325 80 110 1230 1356 126
Julian Fell 939 1012 268 324 100 110 1307 1446 139
Kirk Bevins 855 951 305 330 80 110 1240 1391 151
Giles Hutchings 793 898 392 425 90 110 1275 1433 158
Chris Davies 853 949 276 330 90 110 1219 1389 170
Conor Travers 860 965 269 324 90 110 1219 1399 180
David O'Donnell 800 916 288 324 70 110 1158 1350 192
Stewart Holden 845 958 242 324 90 110 1177 1392 215
Oliver Garner 793 919 294 327 50 110 1137 1356 219
Chris Cummins 789 984 305 314 90 110 1184 1408 224
Graeme Cole 781 922 296 321 40 110 1117 1353 236
Chris Wills 809 1024 304 330 100 110 1213 1464 251
Mark Tournoff 760 959 267 324 100 110 1127 1393 266
Paul James 781 933 247 330 70 110 1098 1373 275
Junaid Mubeen 713 950 295 324 90 110 1098 1384 286
Jack Worsley 716 942 308 327 40 110 1064 1379 315
John Mayhew 789 960 204 327 80 110 1073 1397 324
Richard Brittain 783 988 289 330 30 110 1102 1428 326
John Davies 721 980 285 330 60 110 1066 1420 354
Nick Wainwright 698 979 278 330 50 110 1026 1419 393
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 1:45 am
by Dave Preece
Thanks Graeme, but just for kicks, can you do 9 rounders - please?
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:00 am
by Dave Preece
What is the average gap between octochamps is all series?
It does seen when one ends its about 3 or 4 or 5 and then another one begins, this may some how prove the heats are seeded... As we know they are...
Also, can the same thing be done for 7 wins, 6 wins, 5 wins, 4 wins etc etc, to prove this in more depth???
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:04 am
by Graeme Cole
Dave Preece wrote:What is the average gap between octochamps is all series?
It does seen when one ends its about 3 or 4 or 5 and then another one begins, this may some how prove the heats are seeded... As we know they are...
Sometimes it is a short time between one octochamp ending and another starting. Indeed, on eleven occasions in Countdown history, there have been back-to-back octochamps. But is this evidence of deliberate seeding? Or is there perhaps some confirmation bias at work here?
We'll measure the "gap" as the number of prelims between one octochamp's debut and the next octochamp's debut. So for back-to-back octochamps, the gap is 8. We're considering prelims up to the end of series 68, which means Glen Webb doesn't get counted.
The average gap between octochamps across all series is 29.3, which means that on average, a new octochamp debuts 21.3 days (about four weeks' worth of shows) after the last one finished.
"But wait," says a hypothetical tinfoil hat man. "You're counting the early series, and octochamps were much rarer then. What if we just look at the last five years?"
Okey dokey. Average gap since the start of 2008 is 19.6 days. So just over a fortnight between one octochamp finishing and the next one starting.
"Did I say five years? I meant four. Can we look at games since 2009?"
Average is 18.3 days.
"Er, I mean 2010."
19.9.
"Since 2011?"
17.8.
"Since 2012, then. There were loads of octochamps in 2012."
16.3.
If it were "3 or 4 or 5" days, we'd be seeing numbers between 11 and 13. And we aren't.
But wait. Tinfoil hat man might then point out that in 2013, in
series 68, there were five octochamps including carry-over champion Glen Webb, and they're all pretty close to each other. Indeed, the average gap between octochamps in that (unusually short) series is 11.25, if we include Glen Webb. (However, after Glen there were 21 games not featuring an octochamp before the next one.) But the story these statistics doesn't tell is that if, say, Joe McGonigle had been on a couple of weeks earlier and had played Eileen Taylor, one of them wouldn't have become an octochamp. However, by moving Joe back a couple of weeks, Joe's eight opponents avoid him, and one of those might have won eight.
If the running order were put together arbitrarily without seeding, we'd get strong players meeting each other in the heats, and we do. Because we're only looking at octochamps in the analysis above, what we don't see is potential octochamps - people who had a good chance of winning eight but came up against another strong player. Zarte won five games, smashing the record aggregate score for a five-time winner, and then met Dylan. If I were given the task of "seeding" the heats, I definitely wouldn't have put those two within eight games of each other. Going back a bit further, Sohail Virdi, Rachael Moran, Philip Jarvis and Sam McElhinney were all good enough to become octochamps, and three of them regularly play or played on apterous, but they ended up playing each other and then Sam lost to Andy Platt. In series 66, promising numberist Chris Butler won three and was beaten in a close game by Peter Lee. In series 65, Matt Croy met Drew Halliburton in a
game which still shares the joint record for the most combined maxes in a prelim (12-11), along with Zarte and Dylan's game. Later on, Phyl Styles won six games and was beaten by Jack Worsley, narrowly missing out on a place in the finals. Further back... Michelle Nevitt met Andy McGurn, and Dave Dyer got an
11-maxer the day before he played Ed McCullagh. Had the running order been slightly different, any of these could have been in the octochamp list and we'd be picking over the number of days between them and the next one.
It's easy, too, to fall into the trap of thinking that the best two, or best three, players in a series never meet in the heats. This is often because we form our idea of who are the top two based on the seeding table, and of course the top two seeds aren't going to meet in the heats, otherwise they won't both be octochamps and therefore almost certainly won't end up being the top two seeds. By the end of series 65, Matt Croy was at about the same level as me (he was keeping score against me in my quarter-final - the conundrum would have been crucial and he got it at the same time as I did), yet he didn't make the finals. Dan McColm lost his first game against Ned Pendleton in series 64. He wasn't a bad player then, and has improved hugely since. Who's to say he wouldn't have been at Ed and Adam's standard come the finals?
Even if the best players were deliberately kept apart in the heats, I don't think it could be shown just by looking at the start dates of octochamps. I don't think it could be disproved, either - proving a negative is a tricky thing. So are (or were) the heats seeded to some small extent? Maybe. I can't disprove it. But looking at the gaps between octochamps isn't going to help decide.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 11:05 am
by Andy Platt
Cool post. In my opinion, 4 of the 8 best players didn't even make finals in Series 68. Although I guess Rachael was for personal reasons.
Phil J was unlucky, and Alex Newton (my 6th prelim) and Alan Flanagan (Giles's 6th prelim) were arguably (well, I'm telling you) better players than Eileen and Joe.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:29 am
by Charlie Reams
Also there's probably some sort of incumbent advantage, which would tend to make back-to-back octochamps more likely. Seems like it'd be quite hard to distinguish the two effects.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:07 pm
by Dave Preece
Thanks Graeme, in depth as ever, good stuff!!!
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:23 pm
by David Williams
Can someone just remind whether we think seeding is a good thing or not, and whether we think it happens or not.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 5:49 pm
by Mark Deeks
Graeme Cole wrote:Dave Preece wrote:What is the average gap between octochamps is all series?
It does seen when one ends its about 3 or 4 or 5 and then another one begins, this may some how prove the heats are seeded... As we know they are...
Sometimes it is a short time between one octochamp ending and another starting. Indeed, on eleven occasions in Countdown history, there have been back-to-back octochamps. But is this evidence of deliberate seeding? Or is there perhaps some confirmation bias at work here?
We'll measure the "gap" as the number of prelims between one octochamp's debut and the next octochamp's debut. So for back-to-back octochamps, the gap is 8. We're considering prelims up to the end of series 68, which means Glen Webb doesn't get counted.
The average gap between octochamps across all series is 29.3, which means that on average, a new octochamp debuts 21.3 days (about four weeks' worth of shows) after the last one finished.
"But wait," says a hypothetical tinfoil hat man. "You're counting the early series, and octochamps were much rarer then. What if we just look at the last five years?"
Okey dokey. Average gap since the start of 2008 is 19.6 days. So just over a fortnight between one octochamp finishing and the next one starting.
"Did I say five years? I meant four. Can we look at games since 2009?"
Average is 18.3 days.
"Er, I mean 2010."
19.9.
"Since 2011?"
17.8.
"Since 2012, then. There were loads of octochamps in 2012."
16.3.
If it were "3 or 4 or 5" days, we'd be seeing numbers between 11 and 13. And we aren't.
But wait. Tinfoil hat man might then point out that in 2013, in
series 68, there were five octochamps including carry-over champion Glen Webb, and they're all pretty close to each other. Indeed, the average gap between octochamps in that (unusually short) series is 11.25, if we include Glen Webb. (However, after Glen there were 21 games not featuring an octochamp before the next one.) But the story these statistics doesn't tell is that if, say, Joe McGonigle had been on a couple of weeks earlier and had played Eileen Taylor, one of them wouldn't have become an octochamp. However, by moving Joe back a couple of weeks, Joe's eight opponents avoid him, and one of those might have won eight.
If the running order were put together arbitrarily without seeding, we'd get strong players meeting each other in the heats, and we do. Because we're only looking at octochamps in the analysis above, what we don't see is potential octochamps - people who had a good chance of winning eight but came up against another strong player. Zarte won five games, smashing the record aggregate score for a five-time winner, and then met Dylan. If I were given the task of "seeding" the heats, I definitely wouldn't have put those two within eight games of each other. Going back a bit further, Sohail Virdi, Rachael Moran, Philip Jarvis and Sam McElhinney were all good enough to become octochamps, and three of them regularly play or played on apterous, but they ended up playing each other and then Sam lost to Andy Platt. In series 66, promising numberist Chris Butler won three and was beaten in a close game by Peter Lee. In series 65, Matt Croy met Drew Halliburton in a
game which still shares the joint record for the most combined maxes in a prelim (12-11), along with Zarte and Dylan's game. Later on, Phyl Styles won six games and was beaten by Jack Worsley, narrowly missing out on a place in the finals. Further back... Michelle Nevitt met Andy McGurn, and Dave Dyer got an
11-maxer the day before he played Ed McCullagh. Had the running order been slightly different, any of these could have been in the octochamp list and we'd be picking over the number of days between them and the next one.
It's easy, too, to fall into the trap of thinking that the best two, or best three, players in a series never meet in the heats. This is often because we form our idea of who are the top two based on the seeding table, and of course the top two seeds aren't going to meet in the heats, otherwise they won't both be octochamps and therefore almost certainly won't end up being the top two seeds. By the end of series 65, Matt Croy was at about the same level as me (he was keeping score against me in my quarter-final - the conundrum would have been crucial and he got it at the same time as I did), yet he didn't make the finals. Dan McColm lost his first game against Ned Pendleton in series 64. He wasn't a bad player then, and has improved hugely since. Who's to say he wouldn't have been at Ed and Adam's standard come the finals?
Even if the best players were deliberately kept apart in the heats, I don't think it could be shown just by looking at the start dates of octochamps. I don't think it could be disproved, either - proving a negative is a tricky thing. So are (or were) the heats seeded to some small extent? Maybe. I can't disprove it. But looking at the gaps between octochamps isn't going to help decide.
Jon Elmer would have Octoed in our series too. As I'm sure would have Graham Mooney-Dalton and Liam Herringshaw. We'll never know for sure, but it seems very likely.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:27 pm
by James S Roper
Sorry if it's unanswerable from your database or if it's already been answered - who's the oldest contestant to ever go on the show?